| From: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Sequence functions |
| Date: | 2003-05-25 13:03:11 |
| Message-ID: | 1053867790.279.136.camel@jester |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2003-05-25 at 00:34, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
> > We need to track sequence usage in things like defaults. nextval()
> > function calls don't easily allow this to happen.
>
> Yeah. The Oracle syntax is seqname.nextval(); AFAIK our syntax
> nextval('seqname') was a quick-and-dirty approximation to that.
I doubt it'll be switched to the Oracle syntax. Most of the new
IDENTITY stuff seems to be based on MSSQL. Some of it is quite nice.
Sequences based on things other than integers would be useful (time
based with an interval incremental).
Perhaps we should just wait it out to see what actually comes through.
Feel free to file your thoughts on NEXT VALUE FOR though! I think there
was someone reading this list that was on the spec team at one point.
--
Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>
PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/rbtpub.asc
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-05-25 13:10:15 | TODO list |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-05-25 04:34:38 | Re: Sequence functions |